On Fri 03 Sep 2021 at 10:40:32 -0400, The Wanderer wrote: [...]
> Are you sure about that last part? > > I have been running with (e.g.) > > deb http://ftp.us.debian.org/debian/ stable main non-free contrib > deb http://ftp.us.debian.org/debian/ testing main non-free contrib > > for over a decade, and while there have been some problems, I think > they've been basically the same ones I'd have seen from running testing > alone; none of them have seemed terribly difficult to resolve, either. > (At least not by my standards, although I'll admit that I may not be the > best or most representative example.) > > I don't particularly consider this mixing releases; it's more tracking > testing, while still keeping available any packages which were in stable > but have been removed from testing. > > IMO, if you're going to track testing at all on a production computer > (as opposed to, well, for the purpose of actually *testing the upcoming > release*), it only makes sense to also include stable; there's too much > chance of an important package being (temporarily or permanently) > unavailable, otherwise. Surely - if you have a package installed from a previous release, it does not get removed simply because testing does not have it? It looks to me that the first line in sources.list does not help in this situation. -- Brian.
